ERBE: Small steps could yield big returns in climate change fight

Finally, there’s some good news on reducing climate change, which is great news. I’m a climate skeptic. It’s not that I’m skeptical about the existence of climate change, but I’m skeptical about mankind’s collective willingness to do anything about it.

Late last year, the Global Carbon Project issued a report showing global emissions of carbon dioxide rose to record levels in 2011 and were on track to rise even higher in 2012. Carbon dioxide is produced most often by the burning of coal.

Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere causes glaciers and ice sheets to melt and warming oceans to expand. But a new study by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, the Scripps Institution for Oceanography, and Climate Central shows that by limiting four other pollutants, scientists can make significant progress toward stemming rising sea levels.

The new study shows that by limiting emissions of four substances — methane, soot, refrigerants, and gases that lead to the formation of ground-level ozone — progress could still be made.

These four gases and particles remain in the atmosphere anywhere from a week to a decade. CO2, on the other hand persists in the atmosphere for more than a century.

The research team found that reductions in those four pollutants would cycle comparatively quickly through the atmosphere. As a result, their limitation could slow the annual rate of sea level rise by roughly 25 to 50 percent.

In any event, the report’s authors note: “The potential impact of rising oceans on populated areas is one of the most concerning effects of climate change. Many of the world’s major cities, such as New York, Miami, Amsterdam, Mumbai and Tokyo, are located in low-lying areas by the water.”

So why would it be easier to regulate emissions of soot and refrigerants than it has been to regulate CO2 emissions? There would be fewer and smaller corporate interests lobbying against their regulation. Soot or black carbon is emitted into the atmosphere when combustion of biomass or fossil fuels is incomplete.

Cooking — with wood, crop residues and dung — is also a major source of soot. One can imagine that a government could more easily regulate cooking with dung than it could fight the powerful coal lobby.

The authors note carbon dioxide emissions must still be cut over time. But this study shows more immediate, substantial gains from limiting the use of shorter-lived pollutants. Cutting emissions of those gases would give coastal communities more time to prepare for rising sea levels. That is a gift of time few saw coming.